So, is it accurate to say that the controls in LR make multi-processing not necessary?
I'm also trying to figure out if I need to learn PS too. Based on the Michael Reichmann/Jeff Schewe series on printing that I bought, it seems that I need to get PS so that I can softproof, but are there other reasons?
And as long as I'm asking questions, is HDR used when the lighting cannot fit within the histogram's left and right borders? That is, assuming that the histrogram is "ok", will LR's controls be sufficient without HDR?
Thanks to all for your answers.
I think these are much harder questions to answer and you should get several opinions.
My take on this: it depends on what you want to do with your images. Print? Post to the web? Project? My feeling is that they all involve a process of "dumbing down" the data from the raw file, but in quite different ways. I am mainly interested in printing, and so am interested in maximising detail but I'm going to lose most my captured dynamic range (I think from memory the best a print can do is about 200:1) and probably some of my colour range.
Sometimes just a part of an image is too bright or dark relative to the rest, and I find multi processing the easiest way to get a result without losing the colours or detail I'm looking for in the rest of the image. If it's just a matter of getting the overall range of shadows and highlights balanced, then LR does the job for me. That said, I also find darkening or lightening using the exposure slider has limits, and so having several exposures to blend can sometimes give a visible improvement in detail and colour, so I always use exposure bracketing where possible, then I can look at the files and work out whether the one shot will do it, or I need to blend from one or more of the other shots. If you are shooting where you control the lighting, you should never need to worry about this. If you are into, say, landscapes and you have no choice on the time of day you are there, bracketing is good.
I use PS for noise, local colour/contrast/lightening/darkening (for example I may be interested in where the eye is being led). And for softproofing and adding borders before printing. A lot of this can be done in LR or with stand alone programs. For example, I use Qimage for printing and I've heard it can do softproofing. I just think PS does the whole thing better. I like having everything saved as layers so when the first print comes out, if something hasn't worked, I can go to that layer in my original tiff, adjust it and re-softproof if necessary, and move it into the version with a border replacing the original. So the file sizes are big, but I can work quickly and Qimage can read layered tiffs. My "print" folder for a given file may contain versions for several different papers and several print sizes. If that makes sense. I resisted buying PS for a year or two, not wanting yet
another learning curve, but I got tired of not being able to talk to photographers on their terms.
There is a difference between HDR and exposure blending. I use exposure blending when, as you say, the lighting range is greater than the camera can capture and having "blown bits" will matter to me. I find exposure blending more pleasing to
my eyes than HDR.
Hope that's some use, David